Chess.com's rating system is quite a bit more generous than Red Hot Pawn's. Chess.com says I am a 1704 player. I have never been above 1700 on RHP over more than 5 years. Currently they have me at 1617, though I did just lose a couple games there. I usually fluctuate in the 1640-1670 range.

I have to call out in advance that there are just two days before I go camping for the Easter break. Sorry if I disappear for four days before the game ends - I notice the game has been created with 7 day move allowance so maybe it's OK.

I have to call out in advance that there are just two days before I go camping for the Easter break. Sorry if I disappear for four days before the game ends - I notice the game has been created with 7 day move allowance so maybe it's OK.

So long as you take that into account and make your moves hurriedly and incautiously, fine.

Chess.com's rating system is quite a bit more generous than Red Hot Pawn's. Chess.com says I am a 1704 player. I have never been above 1700 on RHP over more than 5 years. Currently they have me at 1617, though I did just lose a couple games there. I usually fluctuate in the 1640-1670 range.

Do you suppose that's because RHP has less casual players? If a noob wants to play chess, they're more likely to do it at chess.com than some other site, which would cause ratings inflation if they don't actively do something about that.

I have to call out in advance that there are just two days before I go camping for the Easter break. Sorry if I disappear for four days before the game ends - I notice the game has been created with 7 day move allowance so maybe it's OK.

So long as you take that into account and make your moves hurriedly and incautiously, fine.

Game over, resigned in humiliation. Got too used to playing players that make mistakes. Good show, sir!

Chess.com's rating system is quite a bit more generous than Red Hot Pawn's. Chess.com says I am a 1704 player. I have never been above 1700 on RHP over more than 5 years. Currently they have me at 1617, though I did just lose a couple games there. I usually fluctuate in the 1640-1670 range.

Do you suppose that's because RHP has less casual players? If a noob wants to play chess, they're more likely to do it at chess.com than some other site, which would cause ratings inflation if they don't actively do something about that.

It's possible. I suspect they use different k-values in their Elo calculations. They might also weight Elo calculations based on how frequently/recently you have played, like FICS does. I just noticed my Chess.com rating changes more for each win/loss. Could be because I have played many fewer games there. We will see how long the high rating lasts.

Chess.com's rating system is quite a bit more generous than Red Hot Pawn's. Chess.com says I am a 1704 player. I have never been above 1700 on RHP over more than 5 years. Currently they have me at 1617, though I did just lose a couple games there. I usually fluctuate in the 1640-1670 range.

Do you suppose that's because RHP has less casual players? If a noob wants to play chess, they're more likely to do it at chess.com than some other site, which would cause ratings inflation if they don't actively do something about that.

It's possible. I suspect they use different k-values in their Elo calculations. They might also weight Elo calculations based on how frequently/recently you have played, like FICS does. I just noticed my Chess.com rating changes more for each win/loss. Could be because I have played many fewer games there. We will see how long the high rating lasts.

With fewer games played, the ratings do change more drastically. Also, ratings change less if you play the same opponent more often and depending on the difference in rating between the players and the number of games both players have on chess.com.

In short, yes, expect it to settle at some point once you have more games to your name there.

Ugh.. totally missed a checkmate. Moller vs MobileOak 1-0. GG Moller, you've gotten much better than when you started playing last year.

Thanks! I was getting ready to set up a piece exchange process to force the end game to really speed up after I threw away my bishop on 23.f4 exd5. At that point I figured it was time to force exchanges until there was basically nothing left. I went to bed last night thinking "I should have played Rxf8+ sooner, now I've missed my shot to use that and I'm down a bishop."

Ugh.. totally missed a checkmate. Moller vs MobileOak 1-0. GG Moller, you've gotten much better than when you started playing last year.

Thanks! I was getting ready to set up a piece exchange process to force the end game to really speed up after I threw away my bishop on 23.f4 exd5. At that point I figured it was time to force exchanges until there was basically nothing left. I went to bed last night thinking "I should have played Rxf8+ sooner, now I've missed my shot to use that and I'm down a bishop."

I was fully expected 24.exd5 Rxa8, not 24.exd5 Bh3!

Yeah I had total tunnel vision, was too focused on a checkmate on you that I missed the queen diagonal.

Didn't see a mate threat from the attack, never thought to consider a forced draw 20 moves in to a even game. Fair result though, I had no idea how to open up his defense for any sort of advantage.

That would be a good game to have a computer analyze at move 20 or 21. I don't see anything concrete either, but at a guess I'd say tuck your king on h1, push the f pawn, try to open things and bring a rook or your bishop into the attack.

Good point - I've set the chess.com computer to analysing it for a start, since I realised I'm a paying member and can do that. I'll share when it's finished doing its thing.

From white's side, I didn't see a way to break through but felt like the rook advance gives black good chances on the queenside: my rook is tied down defending that bishop, and black has ample time to grab the a-pawn and almost certainly the b-pawn.

Even if the bishop escapes, it's less effective than black's bishop, and I didn't like the look of the queenside attack that followed.

I think the verdict is that it was better for black, but not decisively so: after Rxc3 the computer agrees it's equal, or at least didn't find a better line for white than the draw. A better analysis might find differently, though.

Thanks for that. 18... Nd4 gives up the forced draw, and it is zero from there, the computer just takes the draw. 19. c3 gives me another chance to stop the draw, though I don't really see the black advantage of 0.44.

It was fun Virog. I later made a big blunder that let you equalize somewhat, besides the pawns. Ultimately your second move was the only real mistake I saw from you, the rest of the game was challenging.

I have to call out in advance that there are just two days before I go camping for the Easter break. Sorry if I disappear for four days before the game ends - I notice the game has been created with 7 day move allowance so maybe it's OK.

So long as you take that into account and make your moves hurriedly and incautiously, fine.

Game over, resigned in humiliation. Got too used to playing players that make mistakes. Good show, sir!

Thanks for the game - I was happy about my position but didn't feel it was unloseable :-)

It was fun Virog. I later made a big blunder that let you equalize somewhat, besides the pawns. Ultimately your second move was the only real mistake I saw from you, the rest of the game was challenging.

Yeah, I was all set to resign much earlier, but decided to try for the draw after seeing things even up a bit.